Quick question for the Crouch doubters...

[Craig_H]

took you a while to spread your doom around. What did you think of it today?

Hehe....he really reels you all in with all the doom and gloom, doesnt he?

He's nothing like that in reality.

[Dhav]

This is my fav Crouch stat...

He went 19 games without a goal.

He has since scored 29 in 68 games for Liverpool football club. Impressive.

And it is for this very reason I wish people who are praising Crouch today and extolling his virtues as compared to Kuyt give the latter a fair crack of the whip.

[anfieldanfield]

And it is for this very reason I wish people who are praising Crouch today and extolling his virtues as compared to Kuyt give the latter a fair crack of the whip.

Fair shout.

[nbryan1764]

I do agree that Crouch is different to Rooney.

But i also think they're both different to an out and out striker, eg a Van Nistelrooy type 'finisher'.

Crouch is obviously different to horseface but I think he has to be considered and out an out striker. He could never play anywhere but up top whereas Rooney could. I agree with Dhavlos, I think Rooney is a second striker.

[Craig_H]

And it is for this very reason I wish people who are praising Crouch today and extolling his virtues as compared to Kuyt give the latter a fair crack of the whip.

TBF, i dont think Kuyt's really had a 'slating', just people werent afraid to acknowledge that he had a bit of a dip in form. Nothing too harsh in saying that mate.

[Lee]

Yup I rate him a lot. When we signed him I wasn't too sure - but - 20 odd goals for a team that got relegated meant he was worth a look at.

And if you take away his first 20-odd games where he didn't score, after that he has an average of one goal every two-and-a-bit games I think. Won us a lot of points. I can't see why people doubt him (well, apart from his crap heading abilities).

[DannyMan2006]

took you a while to spread your doom around. What did you think of it today?

That is actually an impressive stat if you takeaway the 19 games. Maybe thats what you mean Jamo?

[Craig_H]

Crouch is obviously different to horseface but I think he has to be considered and out an out striker. He could never play anywhere but up top whereas Rooney could. I agree with Dhavlos, I think Rooney is a second striker.

Depends how deep we want to break it down mate. Out and out striker, leader of the line, poacher - are they all the same?

Target man...where does that fit in?

Second striker, withdrawn striker, forward...all the same?

It's fun, isnt it?

[nbryan1764]

And it is for this very reason I wish people who are praising Crouch today and extolling his virtues as compared to Kuyt give the latter a fair crack of the whip.

I personally don't see Kuyt as an out an out striker. He doesn't seem to want to be in the box enough. They are obviously very different players but I think Crouch will generally score more goals.

[Craig_H]

I personally don't see Kuyt as an out an out striker. He doesn't seem to want to be in the box enough. They are obviously very different players but I think Crouch will generally score more goals.

Agree.

[Dhav]

I do agree that Crouch is different to Rooney.

But i also think they're both different to an out and out striker, eg a Van Nistelrooy type 'finisher'.

Agreed, but surely Crouch is closer to being the Van Nistelrooy type-finisher than Rooney is? I know Crouch does a lot of good work holding up the ball, bringing others into the game etc, but what I mean is that with the wingers getting crosses in etc, the team is very much geared towards creating chances for Crouch to score from, which is why he should be judged on being an out-and-out striker and be judged on how clinical he is.

[nbryan1764]

Depends how deep we want to break it down mate. Out and out striker, leader of the line, poacher - are they all the same?

Target man...where does that fit in?

Second striker, withdrawn striker, forward...all the same?

It's fun, isnt it?

I guess I look at it quite simplisticly. Your out and out striker, be it a poacher, target man etc, is the one you expect to be usually working in and around the middle of the pitch whereas your second striker is generally working in other areas. For us for example, I would say Fowler and Crouch are out and out, while Bellmay and Kuyt are second strikers.

[DannyMan2006]

I personally don't see Kuyt as an out an out striker. He doesn't seem to want to be in the box enough. They are obviously very different players but I think Crouch will generally score more goals.

I guess what we can't take into account is the instructions Rafa gives them, or how they perform in training.

For instance, had I not known that Ciise was thick as two short planks and hadn't been able to grasp how to bend his runs to stay onside (after a whole week or mores training) I would have wondered why Rafa didnt give him more time.

[Dhav]

I personally don't see Kuyt as an out an out striker. He doesn't seem to want to be in the box enough. They are obviously very different players but I think Crouch will generally score more goals.

I see your point, and that is something that has surprised me about Dirk. I thought he was bought as an out-and-out striker and a penalty box player rather than playing more withdrawn. I wonder if this is how he plays, or if it is instructions he has had from Rafa etc.

[nbryan1764]

I guess what we can't take into account is the instructions Rafa gives them, or how they perform in training.

For instance, had I not known that Ciise was thick as two short planks and hadn't been able to grasp how to bend his runs to stay onside (after a whole week or mores training) I would have wondered why Rafa didnt give him more time.

and we never know that but I feel that when Crouch or Fowler arent playing we have too many occassions where we dont have players attacking the box. I can't imagine that Rafa tells his forwards to do all their work outside the box and not attack it when we have the chance.